Your problem is you dont accept examples stick in your own Libyan army was well "equiped" in perspective of 1980's and Indian RCL gunners played key role in defeating Pakistani armour,
And your problem is that you are dumb, poorly educated teenager who tries to teach adults how to do things. Hey maybe go to your father and try to teach him how to made children eh?
How many young people? Low birth rate and declining of ethnic population is problem all over Europe.
It does not matter how many, and I preatty much don't care if in Germany or other western European country there are problems. In my country such problems are minor, and we are not political correct nation, so any minority is welcome if they accept our rules.
It is something immposible that muslim children would be able to terrorize our children in schools like they do in Germany, but this is a very nature of slavic countries, we have different perception on this subjects.
Yes because still cost of flying car is too heavy people wont buy in large scale unless they became cheap.
And they won't be cheap. Besides please, explain me, why I would need such thing? To do what? To fly without a purpose? Where I would land? I would need to build landing strip on my street? Immposible, to expensive and stree is too short.
So please explain me, why for the sake of logic, I should purchase such useless piece of junk?
Your tank addiction says me all. My IQ well improved it is you who does not understand examples and reality.
No, you are still, little dumb piece of shit.
Sorry, this is reality.
What plane was used in CAS? Dont people die in ground war? Terrorists use civilians as human shield , you need infantry neither tanks nor aircraft to clear house to house from insurgents.
A-10 for example dumbass. And yes, people generally die in wars, because wars are nasty thing. And yes terrorists use civilians as shields.
As for infantry, infantry is fragile, and can't do much without support from AFV's, AFV's like tanks and IFV's provide protection, supressive fire, draw enemy attention so infantry is safer and can do it's tasks. It is a system, althout I doubt you understand what system is.
And then let enemy to take out your vehicles by land mines and RPG and air strike? US planners are more matured than you if armed Mechanized troops are better they would not do bombing of Iraq in 1991.
And this is probably why US planners in 1991 used huge armor mechanized formations to literally destroy Iraqi armed forces. This is also why US planners done exactly the same in 2003. This is probably why Israeli planners say openly that in 2006, if they would not use tanks, their forces would take much more casualties, and this is probably why Israeli planners openly admitted that IAF is overfunded waste of money with small efficency, and why IDF (ground forces) should receive more money, this is probably also why IDF decided that instead of closing Merkava tank production plant, they will order more brand new Merkava Mk4 and heavy Namer APC's. This is probably why British Army resigned from scrapping Challenger 2 tanks, and decided that they need to modernize them untill new tank to replace them will be avaiable. This is probably why Russian Army wants 3 completely new modular platforms among them heavy platform "Armata" for a next generation MBT.
Damn this is probably why, in my own country, goverment and Military funds programs to purchase new AFV's, among them also tanks.
So who is dumb here?
It is perfect reason why you are so much addicted to tank, the sites I gave you are best and they are first hand report yes Tanks were blown up by 30 mm and T 10 rockets if you dont want to believe make a time machine and go there see it in your own eyes stupid.
The sites you give are worth nothing more than pile of shit.
Hawker Hunter uses 30mm ADEN automatic cannon, which is shity anti armor weapon system, I don't even know how you use it efficently against any tank. And T10 rockets are French for SNEB launchers, it's calliber is not something impressive, neither should be very effective, even with HEAT warhead. And then there is also problem of accuracy of such weapon system.
No, lots of people use the term "Warship" to refer any type of ship of combat than your Battleship. And they are smarter than you. Grammatically both battle and War mean combat so both Battleship and warship mean those ships with combat ability how ever Battleship is only used to refer Big warship.
Ok, but you are neither smarter than me dumbass, neither I am interested in Navy vessels really.
NATO operations? Indian army is best in COIN operation with vast experience. You Mean NATO insurgent operations? Where does NATO fight? In Afghanistan? Well Taliban is more like a militia force than insurgent force plus they are poorly trained same to Iraq's where as Kashmir's terrorists are all Pakistani army trained.
Perhaps you are mixing militia force with insurgent force right?
Involvement of Pakisthani SF behind attack on September 26 ( NSFW )
If you think that Talibans or Iraqi insurgents were and are all incompetent fools, then you are just like that, an incompetent, ignorant fool. Many of them are former military, smart, and dangerous, inflicting a lot of casualties. Our soldiers respect them as enemy.
Show me, tanks in Pacific were used as artillery pieces as their mobility was limited. Yes in some big island's such as Okinawa tanks performed well not to mention Japanese anti tank system was not good like Germans but in tropical islands Tanks played minor role.
Yeah, aha, and this is why USMC is funding it's tank battalions up to this day? They see how usefull tanks are, in fact USMC today is deeply modernizing it's tanks to increase their capabilities even further.
Infact most of tanks were slightly damaged crews then could not drive them any more and thus abandoned and India showed them in various places as war trophy which does not happen in case of Helicopters generally.
Because this is what happens, when something that fragile, hit the ground at high speed:
Not much to display, untill You wish to display a piece of junk.
Leopard 2 is excellent tank the problem for India is not only bridge but also terrain of Punjab and Gujarat are not suitable for them, earth is too soft more ever does Polish army fight several thousands feet height like Indian army? T 90s to border of China, T 72's to Punjab and Gujarat while Arjuns for Rajasthan desert.
Look at the map. We had plenty of rivers, big and small, we have mountains, we have a lots of forests and also swaps and lakes, still yet, we do not have a problems with operating here tanks weighting well above 55 tons.
Indian Arjun and British Challenger 2 use rifled gun.
Smaller capabilities?
So what they use obsolete armament systems? Future is only for smoothbore guns, everyone knows it. Who besides India manufactures rifled guns for tanks? Even UK long time ago admitted rifled gun have limited capabilities to smoothbore, now however they have a huge problem with rearming Challenger 2 with smoothbore, because it was designed for rifled gun with 3 piece ammunition, while smoothbores use single piece ammo.
As for smaller capabilities, ammunition fired from rifled guns have inferior capabilities, it's APFSDS ammunition for a 120mm ones, have penetration levels for late 1980's and early 1990's types of APFSDS for smoothbore guns.
Arjun (tank) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You need to know some thing about Napoleonic war and US revolutionary war era things, while smooth bore Brown Bess and Charleville musket vs Baker rifle and Kentucky long rifle, while muskets are horribly inaccurate but high rate of fire and for rifles it was opposite.
You moron, I do not talk about muskets firing ball shaped projectiles. Modern smoothbore guns use fin stabilized projectiles at velocities exceeding 1000 m/s, some APFSDS rounds achieve velocity of 1700 m/s, why you bring here a musket? Are you sane for Christ sake?
Air craft costs too much compared to AFV and aircraft is aircraft, yes using other energy than fossil oil it can be also used in air craft and new weapons for armour armour penetration of course technology advances in all way not only to improve tank's armour.
Jet powered aircrafts can't be improved, how you would achieve required speed by use of hybrid diesel-electric or only electric engine?
You can use only fossil fuels for them.
Mech is a completely moronic idea. Why the hell I would want to sit in tall, easy to spot, low manouverable vehicle, which have problems with balance, can't be armored properly due to it's large internal volume needed for crew and all these hydraulic systems to move it's legs?
This is a pure fantasy to have a mech as battle machine, not to mention how large it would have pressure under it's legs feet, to compensate it would require to have feets lare to level that is impractical.
I completely understand that a kid like you who like computer games might believe in such bollocks, but scientisits and engineers do not.
As for nanotechnology, who give a damn to these concerns when it comes to military? This is same like depleted uranium, bunch of morons freak out about DU used in ammunition or armor, and hey, military don't give a damn, and in fact it's impacts on health or environement is minimal.
In future we will be able to create lightweight, ultrastrong structures thanks to nanotechnology. Did you ever heard about graphene? Graphene is 100 times stronger than strongest steel. Did you ever heard about ADNR or fullerenes? These materials are one of the hardest materials known to humanity, harder than diamonds. Or carbon nanotubes.
This is the future also for armor, we will be able to reduce weight of both body armor or vehicle armor, without sacrificing protection capabilities, this will be a true revolution.
Perhaps even in civilian use we will have thanks to these materials a real revolution. New structural materials for, let's say cars, which will make them stronger, better protecting people inside in case of accident. Probably even aircrafts will benefit from these materials, making them safer, more durable.
and can be proven wrong again if SAM systems development gets ahead of jets.
Nothing wrong to protect your own. I am very much concerned about future of Europe, homosexuality, low birth rate increase of old people trying replenish it taking immigrants from Asia and Africa? Stupid idea. No multiculturalism in Europe
:blah:
